3 division games on the bounce coming up and we can win them and guarantee the playoffs.

Then it's the Titans at home so that would be at least 11 wins and chance of a division title.

Let's not get too downhearted.

The problem is that this and the 49ers game exposed the Packers. This game wasn't an abberation that you can just burn the tape. As has been noted by others, the OL is awful, and this team will continue to be demolished if they face a quality front 4 and corners willing to press at the line. Great, the Packers beat the lowly Titans and Vikings - but once they face the '9ers and Giants again, it'll be the same demolition.

We disagree greatly here. 22 carries for 82 yds is not what I consider an overt dedication to running the football. Lets be real here too, Starks got 8 of those carries, AFTER the damage was already done.

You want to keep Aaron on his feet with time to throw? Have your OL ready to pound the frickin ball at the Giants front 7, mercilessly. Have both of your backs ready to run in rotation.

Neither happened last night. This is the 3rd time we put up a FAIL against a top tier defensive front. All 3 times we lost because we did not do this: perform a power rushing assault.

We can do it, but we choose not to. Our OL is not prepared to run it, and our play callers fail to call it. It is the recipe for success against a formidable pass rush. Why keep doing something over and over again when it doesn't work?

I'm too lazy to look up all the stats and sequence of play calls from last night, but this team was down 24-7 early in the 2nd quarter. There isn't a team in the NFL that will run the ball as you suggest if faced with that circumstance. On a bigger scale I agree with you. Somehow this finess approach won a super bowl, but it seems to have given a false sense of security to this team. The Falcons, '9ers, and Giants all have the ability to ground and pound, and whether or not the team commits to it, I question if they have the meat up front effectively do so.

M.M's approach is focused on OL protection waiting for late developing downfield routes, and the team does not have the ability to do that right now.

I'm too lazy to look up all the stats and sequence of play calls from last night, but this team was down 24-7 early in the 2nd quarter. There isn't a team in the NFL that will run the ball as you suggest if faced with that circumstance. On a bigger scale I agree with you. Somehow this finess approach won a super bowl, but it seems to have given a false sense of security to this team. The Falcons, '9ers, and Giants all have the ability to ground and pound, and whether or not the team commits to it, I question if they have the meat up front effectively do so.

M.M's approach is focused on OL protection waiting for late developing downfield routes, and the team does not have the ability to do that right now.

OK, here is the first half summary of our rushing attempts:

12 rushes for 55 yds. And that is WITH Rodgers 2 scrambles.

I don't know how many times I have said this here this season, but McCarthy has got to get a better handle on committing to the run. Especially against a team with a dominant pass rush.

10 attempts. 10 run plays called for an entire half. Yeah, we're gonna lose. That is precisely the kind of shit that will get any team down 24-7 early in the 2nd quarter... against a fierce NYG front seven looking to get their team back on track.

Those downfield routes work best when the opposing D is forced to honor the run.

'But the fact of the matter was this Sunday night: The Packers (7-4) loss to the Giants (7-4), in the grand scheme of things, did not matter.

Oh, winning certainly would have been preferred, but it was hardly essential to the Packers’ long-term goals. If you don’t believe that, consider the cautious way coach Mike McCarthy approached the game injury-wise (not playing wide receiver Greg Jennings despite Jennings’ Friday claim that he was “ready,” not pushing Matthews to return from his hamstring injury) and the fact that the Giants lost last year’s regular-season meeting here (38-35 on Dec. 4).

With that result, the Packers improved to 12-0 and the Giants fell to 6-6 … and went on to beat the Packers in the playoffs and win Super Bowl XLVI. In fact, the Giants walked out of MetLife Stadium talking about how much confidence they'd gained -- by losing.

So maybe the Packers’ quality of play reflected that relative unimportance?

“Maybe it’s a good reminder of what happens when you don’t come to play,” veteran defensive tackle Ryan Pickett said. “I’m telling you, we’re going to take this as a positive. We didn’t have enough energy. They played harder than us. That’s not going to happen again. If we lose, it’s not going to be because a team played harder than us.

“That’s just not going to happen. It’s not acceptable around here. It definitely won’t happen again. This will be motivation for us the rest of the year.”"

That's half our starters on D! Did you really expect walden and Moses to be able to get pressure? Our o-line also had no chance against that NY d-line. We match up terribly with the giants. We have to hope that Chicago, san Fran, new orleans, or atlanta can knock them out for us come playoff time. We just have no answer for them.

People who work together will win, whether it be against complex football defenses, or the problems of modern society. -Vince Lombardi

That's half our starters on D! Did you really expect walden and Moses to be able to get pressure? Our o-line also had no chance against that NY d-line. We match up terribly with the giants. We have to hope that Chicago, san Fran, new orleans, or atlanta can knock them out for us come playoff time. We just have no answer for them.

I'm just throwing this out there, but did you see how many times the Giants OL were holding our pass rushers, without penalty? I saw quite a few, especially involving Moses. The kid was playing pretty well I thought. Looked like at least a half dozen times the Giants were -not- called for holding our players.

And, yes, I do expect Walden and Moses to get pressure on Eli, along with Worthy, Daniels, Pickett, Raji and Neal. Our front 7 played horribly, and they were being held frequently.

We match up terribly with the giants. We have to hope that Chicago, san Fran, new orleans, or atlanta can knock them out for us come playoff time. We just have no answer for them.

I'd like to add a correction to your post, millertime:

"We just have no answer for [any team that decides to play 2-deep safety with man coverage underneath]".

Frankly, it's astonishing that we still cannot find some solution to this coverage. Teams, when they generally play this, have success against us.

I'm at a loss to explain why we cannot figure this scheme out. Is McCarthy an idiot for not being able to utilize his vast array of talent (namely, Finley) to attack 1-on-1 mismatches underneath? Are the players (collection of O-line + RBs) really that crappy that they cannot run against only 6 or 7 men in the box? Obviously players are not winning 1-on-1 battles, but this seems to be the recurring theme whenever we struggle. I'm really interested in the "why do we struggle" seemingly any time teams scheme us in this specific way.

This is a recurring theme from last season: teams decide to get physical and play to take away our deep stuff, then we struggle. Frankly, after still not getting any feeling that some solution is imminent or the coaching staff has a workable counter-plan of attack, I'm about ready to say that this team (namely coaches) should be in panic mode about being 1-and-done in the playoffs again.

It is unfortunate to watch your team and know deep down that they are outmatched (mostly physically) in the conference. Offense and defense are both average with moments of good play but no consistency. Giants and 49ers have our number unfortunately.

The Packers have been thoroughly defeated twice in the last four in half years. That's a remarkable fact. It just shows how competitive Green Bay's been with Aaron Rodgers and Mike McCarthy. Both losses, however, were at the expense of the Giants.

There is a fundamental problem in matching up with them. They simply overpower Green Bay along the line of scrimmage and Eli does a good job of managing the clock. He ran the play clock down quite a bit in the first half. I’m sure Clay Matthews makes a difference, but the Packers are going to have to make fundamental changes to their game plan if these teams meet again. For starters, a short and precise passing game that centers on Jermichael Finley helps. In addition, the Giants would have difficulties guarding both Jennings and Cobb in the slot. The Packers should learn from this experience.

It is unfortunate to watch your team and know deep down that they are outmatched (mostly physically) in the conference. Offense and defense are both average with moments of good play but no consistency. Giants and 49ers have our number unfortunately.

I disagree.

We can beat either of those teams.

The Cowboys had our number in the 90s. These teams our not insurmountable.

We lost this game because 1: The Giants were coming out fresh off a bye, 2: Were doing so AT HOME and 3: We played like we did against the Lions.

Take away any one of those factors and it's a different game. We've shown we can beat this team, they've just won the last two, that's all.

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

The Packers got their collective butts handed to them in every aspect of the game.The Pack looked totally unprepared. Our defense looked like last year'd defense, and out offense suked big. It was like watching a replay of the playoff loss last year.You'd think after getting pummeled more then once by the Giants that the Packer coaches would get a clue.

How about a different take on what happened Sunday night against the Giants?

Was McCarthy holding his cards closer to the vest? Did he start the "...Not a Must Win" thread? I've read some commentary along those lines recently, implying that he certainly was not trying too hard to get a win in NY. Holding out a bunch of players that could have played might be shining a new light on his approach. Maybe they simply tossed this game, especially after it had gotten beyond reasonable for a come back attempt. Maybe they were going to play a limited game from the start, and let what happens happens.

McCarthy and his team did not show a lot. That is for sure. I've got to agree that if we're going to win one, it might as well be in the playoffs.

Do I agree with this kind of tact? No. Can I see it as a possibility? Yes. Limited personnel to protect against further injury. Limited gameplan to protect your future intentions.

How about a different take on what happened Sunday night against the Giants?

Was McCarthy holding his cards closer to the vest? Did he start the "...Not a Must Win" thread? I've read some commentary along those lines recently, implying that he certainly was not trying too hard to get a win in NY. Holding out a bunch of players that could have played might be shining a new light on his approach. Maybe they simply tossed this game, especially after it had gotten beyond reasonable for a come back attempt. Maybe they were going to play a limited game from the start, and let what happens happens.

McCarthy and his team did not show a lot. That is for sure. I've got to agree that if we're going to win one, it might as well be in the playoffs.

Do I agree with this kind of tact? No. Can I see it as a possibility? Yes. Limited personnel to protect against further injury. Limited gameplan to protect your future intentions.

The thought has crossed my mind, and it doesn't make me happy. If it was just resting players, I could live with that, but he seemed to be calling vanilla plays as well which I don't like. And would hate if I was a player.

You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.